Lawlessness seems to be an expression of freedom in SA
AUDACIOUS. That sums up the ANC’s leaders in government and their alliance partners.
They do not in any way seem
perturbed about the prospects of
undoing in two terms what it took
centuries for a string of liberation
struggle leaders and committed
comrades to achieve.
The prosperity and longevity of
a nation in the modern era largely
depends on the quality and
strength of its institutions.
But institutions do not build nor
preserve themselves. They are
vulnerable to the manipulation of
the political leadership that have been appointed custodians.
SA ’ s democratic institutional
framework was designed with the
past in mind. The architects of our
constitution and political system
aimed to establish unity where
there was only division, inclusive-
ness where exclusion was the
norm, fairness where injustice was
supreme, accountability and trans-
parency where secrecy and arbi-
trary rule were germane.
It is these considerations that
informed, for instance, the propor-
tional representation system we
use for elections, the establish-
ment of chapter nine institutions
and separation of powers and the
institution of the principle of con-
stitutional supremacy.
This is what was to hold a
divided nation together moving
into a new and uncharted future.
One of the most difficult things
for a divided nation to do is to
identify a common vision for the
future.
This task in SA is further com-
plicated by the maturation of a type
of politics that is centred on mate- rialism and political patronage.
Under the ANC’s watch, these
politics have blossomed. Defenders
of the administration such as Blade Nzimande, Gwede Mantashe, Nkosinathi Nhleko – who
have been in the news for their
shared but hardly substantiated
criticism of the judiciary
invariably defending these politics.
In this context, what suffers the
most is the common good. The
type of politics championed by this
administration elevates self-inter-
est as the primary agenda. As cit-
izens behold the conduct of the
political leadership, they too are
emboldened to undermine the fab-
ric of civic life motivated by the
same self-interest.
–
are
Ancient Greek, Athenian rhetorician Isocrates’s lamentation about democracy is apt. “Democ-
racy destroys itself because it
abuses its right to freedom and
equality. Because it teaches its cit-
izens to consider audacity as a
right, lawlessness as a freedom, abrasive speech as equality, anarchy as progress.”
Looting, greed, corruption will
always be the order of the day if
self-aggrandisement is the driving
motive of leaders and society. The
results are crime, violence and all
forms of vice. Political parties like
the EFF that thrive on being abra-
sive in national discourse and that
push anarchist political conduct in public spaces are the germination of the ANC’s abuse of the right to
freedom.
Those who perpetuate racism in
society and the social and eco-
nomic inequality that pervades all
aspects of life in democratic SA
are emboldened by the lesson taught us by the president and his
–
cabinet
that audacity is a right.
It is ironic then that the gov-
ernment was surprised when
motorists in Gauteng were reso- lute in refusing to pay e-tolls when “somebody ” has refused to “pay back the money”. Lawlessness is
an expression of freedom.
When self replaces the common
good, everything in political and
social life is divisive. The plurality
that is the strength of democracy
becomes its weakness. Civic life
deteriorates into a race about get-
ting ahead of the next person; at any and all cost and by any means.
SA ’ s political leadership has no
sense of a grand vision for the progress and development of the
– the common good.
entire nation
The failure of ANC administra-
tions subsequent to the Mandela
years to articulate a common vision
for a united society and move
beyond rhetoric has allowed anar-
chy and lawlessness to take hold.
The National Development Plan aside, the undermining of the very pillars of our democracy – our insti
–
tutions
demonstrates a dearth of
vision and selfishness that will jeop-
ardise the future for the present
generation and generations to come.
What kind of response has the
audacity of our political leadership
elicited from citizens? What effect
has it had and will it have on elec-
toral politics and voter behaviour
as the 2016 local government elec-
tions approach?
Life in SA can be summarised in this cliché: “Everyone for himself and God for us all.” Political and
social life is characterised by polar-
isation. Democracy as it has been
interpreted and applied by contem-
porary political leadership has had
the unintended consequence of
strengthening divisions among
groups already historically divided
along race, class and ideology.
The gradual erosion of demo-
cratic institutions, the weakening
of the fabric of society, and the
destruction of social harmony has
not produced a groundswell of
united opposition against the ANC. What it has done is cause cit
–
izens to retreat to the familiar their own race, own cultural group and historical communities – and that ’ s what informs their votes.
Self-interest and desire for self-
preservation has blinded citizens
to their common interest. The pub-
lic voice is fragmented. The oppo-
sition is weak because of narrow
interests. But citizens should be
coming together against the
biggest threat to our democracy
yet, the erosion of our institutions.